# C_2020262EN.01000802.xml

| 10.8.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 262/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.8.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 262/8

---

Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 4 June 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul Cluj — Romania) — SC C.F. SRL v A.J.F.P.M. and D.G.R.F.P.C

(Case C-430/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Principles of EU law - Observance of the rights of the defence - Tax procedure - Exercise of the right to deduct with regard to value added tax (VAT) - Refusal of the right to deduct on account of the allegedly improper conduct of the taxable person’s suppliers - Administrative act issued by the national tax authorities without giving the taxpayer access to the information and the documents on which the act was based - Suspicion of tax evasion - National practice pursuant to which exercise of the right to deduct is subject to the possession of supporting documents other than the tax invoice - Whether permissible)

(2020/C 262/12)

Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Tribunalul Cluj

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: SC C.F. SRL

Defendants: A.J.F.P.M. and D.G.R.F.P.C

Operative part of the judgment

| 1. | The general EU law principle of observance of the rights of the defence must be interpreted as meaning that where, in the context of national administrative procedures for inspection and for determining the taxable amount for value added tax purposes, a taxable person has not been allowed access to the information in the administrative file that was taken into consideration when an administrative decision imposing additional tax liabilities on that taxable person was adopted, and where the court hearing the case finds that, in the absence of that irregularity, the outcome of the procedure might have been different, that principle requires that that decision be annulled. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The general EU law principle of observance of the rights of the defence must be interpreted as meaning that where, in the context of national administrative procedures for inspection and for determining the taxable amount for value added tax purposes, a taxable person has not been allowed access to the information in the administrative file that was taken into consideration when an administrative decision imposing additional tax liabilities on that taxable person was adopted, and where the court hearing the case finds that, in the absence of that irregularity, the outcome of the procedure might have been different, that principle requires that that decision be annulled.

| 2. | The principles governing the application by the Member States of the common system of value added tax (VAT), in particular the principles of fiscal neutrality and legal certainty, must be interpreted as precluding, in the event that a national tax authority merely has uncorroborated doubts about whether the economic operations giving rise to the issue of a tax invoice were actually carried out, the taxable person to which that invoice is addressed from being refused the right to deduct VAT where he is unable to produce, in addition to the invoice, other evidence that the economic operations were actually carried out. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The principles governing the application by the Member States of the common system of value added tax (VAT), in particular the principles of fiscal neutrality and legal certainty, must be interpreted as precluding, in the event that a national tax authority merely has uncorroborated doubts about whether the economic operations giving rise to the issue of a tax invoice were actually carried out, the taxable person to which that invoice is addressed from being refused the right to deduct VAT where he is unable to produce, in addition to the invoice, other evidence that the economic operations were actually carried out.

---

(1)  OJ C 288, 26.8.2019.

---